Premium research interface

The modern interface for aviation safety intelligence.

Search investigations, review source evidence, monitor watched reports, and trace long-term patterns from one calm, data-first workspace.

63k+
Reports indexed
1940-2026
Coverage
Recent
Last data refresh
Featured Report

Loading…

Loading featured report…

Loading…
Open Report

Safety trends by operating rule

Track fatal and non-fatal accident patterns across Part 91, Part 135, and Part 121 operations.

Loading trend charts…

Browse the aviation graph

Move quickly by aircraft, airport, operator, and time with indexes built for research, not wandering.

Last Data Update

By Decade

By Month

Aircraft Manufacturer

More manufacturers

Airports

More airports

Operators

More operators

About

Aviation safety reports, made easier to study

NTSB Reports is an independent research and search tool for public aviation accident and incident records. It brings NTSB aviation reports, structured fields, docket files, extracted figures, photos, videos, and update history into one searchable interface.

The goal is practical safety education: make it faster to find relevant investigations, compare similar events, review factual records, and understand the evidence behind probable-cause and preliminary reports.

The investigative work and source records belong to the National Transportation Safety Board and the published investigation record. This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the NTSB.

FAQs

NTSB Report

May 26, 2024 · Cessna 172S · N1254D

Pierson, FL

Overview

Report Status
Probable Cause
Event Type
Accident
Date
May 26, 2024
Injury Outcomes
2 injuries (2 minor injuries)
Location
Pierson, FL
Aircraft
Cessna 172S (2006)
Tail Number
N1254D
Injuries
Minor
Aircraft Damage
Substantial
NTSB Number
ERA24LA231

The private pilot and the flight instructor had been practicing emergency engine-out procedures in preparation for the private pilot’s commercial checkride. The pilot stated that he just completed the emergency procedure for a simulated engine fire, which evolved into a simulated loss of engine power. He entered a steep spiral over the airport from 2,500 ft mean sea level (msl) to lose altitude and entered the left downwind leg of the traffic pattern at 1,200 ft msl. The private pilot said that while turning from downwind to base, the flight instructor suddenly took control of the airplane because the engine oil temperature annunciator illuminated. The flight instructor made a sharp turn onto final approach and declared an emergency. The airplane was high, so the flight instructor extended the flaps and performed a maximum forward slip to lose altitude. The airplane touched down more than halfway down the 2,600-ft-long turf runway before contacting a ditch, and then nosed over. The airplane’s vertical stabilizer/rudder and a wing strut were substantially damaged during the accident sequence. The pilot said the engine never lost power and was operating right up until impact. The flight instructor said he had experienced an emergency about three months prior to the accident due to a cracked engine case, during which the engine was loud and would vibrate when he applied full power. He said he did not want to add power to go-around because he was concerned that he was dealing with similar scenario or that the engine would catch fire due to the high oil temperature. A postaccident test-run of the engine was conducted utilizing the airplane’s existing fuel and oil systems. The engine started immediately, and all engine parameters were normal. A separate functional test of the oil temperature probe revealed that it operated within normal range. No mechanical deficiencies were noted with the engine that would have precluded normal operation. According to flight data downloaded from the airplane’s digital avionics, each time the throttle was decreased to idle while performing the engine out simulations, there was a progressive increase in oil temperature. As such, it is most likely that the engine did not have time to cool down in between each engine-out simulation and the oil temperature gradually increased until the annunciator came on.

NTSB Probable Cause

The flight instructor’s failure to attain a proper touchdown point during a precautionary landing, which resulted in a runway excursion during landing.

Full Narrative

The private pilot and the flight instructor had been practicing emergency engine-out procedures in preparation for the private pilot’s commercial checkride. The pilot stated that he just completed the emergency procedure for a simulated engine fire, which evolved into a simulated loss of engine power. He entered a steep spiral over the airport from 2,500 ft mean sea level (msl) to lose altitude and entered the left downwind leg of the traffic pattern at 1,200 ft msl. The private pilot said that while turning from downwind to base, the flight instructor suddenly took control of the airplane because the engine oil temperature annunciator illuminated. The flight instructor made a sharp turn onto final approach and declared an emergency. The airplane was high, so the flight instructor extended the flaps and performed a maximum forward slip to lose altitude. The airplane touched down more than halfway down the 2,600-ft-long turf runway before contacting a ditch, and then nosed over. The airplane’s vertical stabilizer/rudder and a wing strut were substantially damaged during the accident sequence. The pilot said the engine never lost power and was operating right up until impact. The flight instructor said he had experienced an emergency about three months prior to the accident due to a cracked engine case, during which the engine was loud and would vibrate when he applied full power. He said he did not want to add power to go-around because he was concerned that he was dealing with similar scenario or that the engine would catch fire due to the high oil temperature. A postaccident test-run of the engine was conducted utilizing the airplane’s existing fuel and oil systems. The engine started immediately, and all engine parameters were normal. A separate functional test of the oil temperature probe revealed that it operated within normal range. No mechanical deficiencies were noted with the engine that would have precluded normal operation. According to flight data downloaded from the airplane’s digital avionics, each time the throttle was decreased to idle while performing the engine out simulations, there was a progressive increase in oil temperature. As such, it is most likely that the engine did not have time to cool down in between each engine-out simulation and the oil temperature gradually increased until the annunciator came on.

Flight

Event TypeAccident
Event Time19:47 EDT
Nearest AirportPierson Muni (0nm ESE)
Runway05/2
Runway Length2600 ft
Runway Width200 ft
Flight Plan FiledNone
Flight Plan ActivatedNo
Aircraft FireNo
Aircraft ExplosionNo

Aircraft

AircraftCessna 172S
Tail NumberN1254D
Aircraft CategoryAir
DamageSubstantial
Operating RulePart 91
Engines1
Engine TypeReciprocating
Engine DetailsLycoming · O-320 · Reciprocating · 180
Seats4

People & Injuries

Injury Summary2 injuries (2 minor injuries)
Fatal0
Serious0
Minor2
Uninjured0
Total2
Crew 1Age 19 · First Class · Minor
Crew 2Age 28 · First Class · Minor

Conditions

ConditionsVMC
LightNight
Wind100° @ 7 kt
Visibility10 sm
CeilingNone
Altimeter29.92 inHg
Observation Time19:55
Weather SourceWFAC

Appendix: Source Data